# 自动化脚本选项中“如果可用则加密PM”复选框还有用武之地吗？
**URL:** https://meta.discourse.org/t/is-there-still-a-use-case-for-the-encrypts-pm-if-available-checkbox-in-automation-script-options/392664
**Category:** UX
**Tags:** encrypt, automation
**Created:** [2026 年1 月 4 日 23:46 UTC](https://meta.discourse.org/t/is-there-still-a-use-case-for-the-encrypts-pm-if-available-checkbox-in-automation-script-options/392664 "2026-01-04T23:46:34Z")
**Posts on this page:** 1
**Showing post:** 3
### Author:  [@zogstrip](https://meta.discourse.org/u/zogstrip)
#### Post date: [2026 年1 月 6 日 10:32 UTC](https://meta.discourse.org/t/is-there-still-a-use-case-for-the-encrypts-pm-if-available-checkbox-in-automation-script-options/392664/3 "2026-01-06T10:32:42Z")
干得漂亮，@Moin 👍
>
>
> The "Encrypts PM if available" checkbox in automation script options was a lefto…ver from the discourse-encrypt plugin, which was archived almost a year ago. Since \`EncryptedPostCreator\` no longer exists, the option had no effect - the code always fell back to using the regular \`PostCreator\`.
>
> This removes all traces of the \`prefers\_encrypt\` feature:
> \- The checkbox UI in the PM field component
> \- The \`prefers\_encrypt\` parameter from \`Utils.send\_pm\`
> \- References in send\_pms and gift\_exchange scripts
> \- The column from the pending\_pms table (via post-deploy migration)
> \- Associated translations and tests
>
> The column removal follows the standard two-phase approach: first declaring \`ignored\_columns\` in the model, then dropping the column in a post-deploy migration.
>
> Ref - https://meta.discourse.org/t/-/392664
---
_[View the full topic](https://meta.discourse.org/t/is-there-still-a-use-case-for-the-encrypts-pm-if-available-checkbox-in-automation-script-options/392664)._